The Nicole Ryan Case

The Nicole Ryan case and the subsequent investigation by the National Post is a most disturbing situation. The newspaper has, at the very least, called into question the correctness of the reasons behind the decision to stay the charges against Ryan. Ryan was acquitted at trial and that acquittal was upheld by the Court of Appeal. The Supreme Court explicitly found that those lower courts were wrong and there was no basis for the acquittals. However, unlike virtually every other Canadian who would have to face a re-trial (especially for a conspiracy to commit murder case like this one), the Court went on to simply toss the charge against her. It appears that the factual basis for doing that is, at the very least, highly suspect. But there is no appeal after the Supreme Court of Canada. Where does the blame lie? Did the Court act impulsively and without proper facts? Did the Crown at trial fail to create a proper record in response to the defence raised? Should a Court ever have the power to simply stay a proceeding simply because they feel the appellant has 'been through enough'?